Not a robbery? If Martinez scored a 10-6 round, he would still loose the fight? How is that not a robbery?
Do you even know what a robbery is? A robbery is when you have already lost before you even get in the ring.
my definition of a robbery is when a fighter loses when he clearly won. last night's fight was not a very clear fight. i had martinez winning but i could see how other people could have scored it for williams. you're focused on that one judge. if they had a fair judge, this fight wouldn't be so controversial. this is just a case of one judge ruining the whole score.
my definition of a robbery is when a fighter loses when he clearly won. last night's fight was not a very clear fight. i had martinez winning but i could see how other people could have scored it for williams. you're focused on that one judge. if they had a fair judge, this fight wouldn't be so controversial. this is just a case of one judge ruining the whole score.
if martinez scored 5 knocked downs, he would have still lost. if thats not a robbery to you then i dont know what is. that judge went into the fight knowing who he was going to pick.
if martinez scored 5 knocked downs, he would have still lost. if thats not a robbery to you then i dont know what is. that judge went into the fight knowing who he was going to pick.
no he wouldnt have , i noticed you have ignored my post explaining this, do the math
the only way it would work how your saying is if paul had gone down 5 times in one round..... after which im pretty sure the fight would have been stopped
if martinez scored 5 knocked downs, he would have still lost. if thats not a robbery to you then i dont know what is. that judge went into the fight knowing who he was going to pick.
yea i got that. you said that already. problem here is that you are so sure that martinez won while others have it a close fight that could have gone either way. no surprise you're screaming robbery.
yea i got that. you said that already. problem here is that you are so sure that martinez won while others have it a close fight that could have gone either way. no surprise you're screaming robbery.
the point here is not to talk about how i have it scored or how every other fan has it scored. the point is to talk about a judge who was hired to rob no matter what. the other judges would have leveled it out but the point is that there was a man that martinez was against sitting on the judges seat.
Originally posted by JMM_135_#1
no he wouldnt have , i noticed you have ignored my post explaining this, do the math
the only way it would work how your saying is if paul had gone down 5 times in one round..... after which im pretty sure the fight would have been stopped
how did that benoist judge score the first round? do you know?
the point here is not to talk about how i have it scored or how every other fan has it scored. the point is to talk about a judge who was hired to rob no matter what. the other judges would have leveled it out but the point is that there was a man that martinez was against sitting on the judges seat.
how did that benoist judge score the first round? do you know?
no i have a sneaking suspiscion it was for williams
the point here is not to talk about how i have it scored or how every other fan has it scored. the point is to talk about a judge who was hired to rob no matter what. the other judges would have leveled it out but the point is that there was a man that martinez was against sitting on the judges seat.
benoist is a bull**** judge, no one's arguing that.
Comment